Survival after pathological complete response following neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

IF 8.8
Jun Okui, Satoru Matsuda, Kengo Nagashima, Yasunori Sato, Hirofumi Kawakubo, Thomas Ruhstaller, Peter Thuss-Patience, Magnus Nilsson, Fredrik Klevebro, Lijie Tan, Shaoyuan Zhang, Thomas Aparicio, Guillaume Piessen, Charlène van der Zijden, Bianca Mostert, Bas P L Wijnhoven, Takahiro Tsushima, Hiroya Takeuchi, Ken Kato, Yuko Kitagawa
{"title":"Survival after pathological complete response following neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma.","authors":"Jun Okui, Satoru Matsuda, Kengo Nagashima, Yasunori Sato, Hirofumi Kawakubo, Thomas Ruhstaller, Peter Thuss-Patience, Magnus Nilsson, Fredrik Klevebro, Lijie Tan, Shaoyuan Zhang, Thomas Aparicio, Guillaume Piessen, Charlène van der Zijden, Bianca Mostert, Bas P L Wijnhoven, Takahiro Tsushima, Hiroya Takeuchi, Ken Kato, Yuko Kitagawa","doi":"10.1093/bjs/znag012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although several oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) studies have reported no definitive overall survival (OS) differences between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), the higher pCR rate with NACRT has been viewed as a potential advantage. Beyond ongoing concerns about the validity of pCR as a surrogate endpoint, it remains uncertain whether survival differs between these modalities among patients with OSCC who achieve pCR.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An integrated analysis of individual patient data (IPD) from phase III trials evaluating perioperative therapies for resectable OSCC was conducted, emphasizing prognostic differences between NAC and NACRT, particularly among patients who achieved pCR.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>IPD from seven phase III RCTs across six countries included data for 1044 patients with OSCC (83.5% male; mean age of 62.3 years). Of these patients, 605 (58.0%) received NAC and 439 (42.0%) received NACRT, with R0 resection rates of 89.6% versus 84.7% and pCR rates of 6.9% versus 34.2% respectively. Among patients who achieved pCR (192 patients), 5-year OS was 97.5% in the NAC group and 70.4% in the NACRT group, while 5-year recurrence-free survival was 80.8% and 63.7% respectively. Multivariable analysis demonstrated a significant survival advantage for NAC among patients who achieved pCR.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Among patients who achieved pCR, postoperative outcomes varied considerably by neoadjuvant treatment modality. The markedly favourable prognosis associated with pCR after NAC suggests that these patients may represent an optimal candidate cohort for future evaluation of surgery-avoidance and watch-and-wait strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":520792,"journal":{"name":"The British journal of surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13017761/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The British journal of surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znag012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Although several oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) studies have reported no definitive overall survival (OS) differences between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), the higher pCR rate with NACRT has been viewed as a potential advantage. Beyond ongoing concerns about the validity of pCR as a surrogate endpoint, it remains uncertain whether survival differs between these modalities among patients with OSCC who achieve pCR.

Methods: An integrated analysis of individual patient data (IPD) from phase III trials evaluating perioperative therapies for resectable OSCC was conducted, emphasizing prognostic differences between NAC and NACRT, particularly among patients who achieved pCR.

Results: IPD from seven phase III RCTs across six countries included data for 1044 patients with OSCC (83.5% male; mean age of 62.3 years). Of these patients, 605 (58.0%) received NAC and 439 (42.0%) received NACRT, with R0 resection rates of 89.6% versus 84.7% and pCR rates of 6.9% versus 34.2% respectively. Among patients who achieved pCR (192 patients), 5-year OS was 97.5% in the NAC group and 70.4% in the NACRT group, while 5-year recurrence-free survival was 80.8% and 63.7% respectively. Multivariable analysis demonstrated a significant survival advantage for NAC among patients who achieved pCR.

Conclusion: Among patients who achieved pCR, postoperative outcomes varied considerably by neoadjuvant treatment modality. The markedly favourable prognosis associated with pCR after NAC suggests that these patients may represent an optimal candidate cohort for future evaluation of surgery-avoidance and watch-and-wait strategies.

食管鳞状细胞癌新辅助化疗与放化疗病理完全缓解后的生存率。
导说:虽然有几项食管鳞状细胞癌(ESCC)的研究报告称,新辅助放化疗(NACRT)和新辅助化疗(NAC)之间没有明确的总生存率(OS)差异,但NACRT更高的病理完全缓解(pCR)率被认为是一种潜在的优势。除了对pCR作为替代终点的有效性的持续关注外,仍不确定这些方式在实现pCR的ESCC患者中是否存在生存差异。方法:对评估可切除ESCC围手术期治疗的III期试验进行综合个体患者数据(IPD)分析,强调NAC和NACRT之间的预后差异,特别是在实现pCR的患者中。结果:IPD来自6个国家的7项III期随机对照试验,包括1044例ESCC患者(83.5%为男性,平均年龄62.3岁)。其中605例(58.0%)接受了NAC, 439例(42.0%)接受了NACRT, R0切除率为89.6%对84.7%,pCR率为6.9%对34.2%。在实现pCR的192例患者中,NAC组和NACRT组的5年OS分别为97.5%和70.4%,5年无复发生存率分别为80.8%和63.7%。多变量分析表明,在实现pCR的患者中,NAC具有显著的生存优势。结论:在实现pCR的患者中,术后结果因新辅助治疗方式的不同而有很大差异。NAC术后与pCR相关的明显良好预后表明,这些患者可能是未来评估手术避免和观察等待策略的最佳候选队列。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书